News:

http://FreeFromFuel.com HHO DVD reduced to only 29.90 Euros. Get it now..Please also make sure you have a valid email Adress over here in your profile, because we need to send out an important Newsletter in Mid of February and you might miss it then...Stay tuned !

According to accepted beliefs in established science, permanent magnets can only convert energy, but are not an energy source by their own.

But there are certain problems with this theory. Strange seems the fact, that very simple experiments obviously do not obey the laws of physics and yet are completely ignored by mainstream science.

One of these experiments that everybody can do at home I will now present to you. It consists of a coreless coil, about 100 turns, a 9V battery and a permanent magnet. Arrange the parts, so when you connect the battery to the coil for a brief moment, the coil will be repelled by the fixed permanent magnet. Measure how far the coil was repelled.

I am quite sure there are formulas that explicitely show how and why the coil went that far, solely based on the electric current consumption from the battery. Seemingly, that's all nice and fine.

Now replace the permanent magnet by a much bigger, stronger permanent magnet. Repeat the exact same test, with the same DC pulse to the coil. This time the coil is pushed much further away than before.

How can this be? We used the same amount of input energy from the battery, but the output as a repelling force has increased. Where does the additional energy come from, if not from the permanent magnet?

In fact, it is stupidly simple. Total force= force of permanent magnet + force of coil.

Basicly, this is exactly what we have been searching for for so long time. A way to turn on and off a permanent magnet. Actually, we turn on and off only whether the coil is reacting to the magnet or not. But the effect is the same.

Conclusions:

By increasing the strength of the permanent magnets, less energy is required by the coils to maintain the same torque.

By infinitely increasing the strength of the magnets, the coils energy requirement would decrease infinitely, while maintaining the same torque.

By infinitely increasing the strength of the magnets, the torque would increase infinitely, therefor there is no linear relation between DC coil pulse and motor torque.

It must be possible to increase the strength of the magnets up to a point, at which the torque delivers enough energy to power an (inductively isolated) conventional generator, which then powers the coil pulses. Such a device would clearly violate a bunch of laws.

Applications

Back in the 19th century magnets were weak and expensive. The introduction of the selfexciting generator without permanent magnets lowered production costs greatly. Mechanical input energy was cheap. So permanent magnet motors and generators became widely obsolete.

Today we have strong Neodymium magnets, it should be possible to obtain considerable amount of torque even with a small motor. Although a big magnet with 1000 pound pull costs maybe 2000$, smaller magnets are much cheaper and can be stacked to increase their strength.

Right now this whole thing sounds too easy and too good to be true. All I can say is I made a test, as described above, with 3 magnets: a tiny Neo, about 5mm x 3mm, a medium size Neo about 5mm x 30mm, and a large stack of 4mm Neo disks, in all about 10mm x 70mm.Coil was 0.5mm average diameter about 20mm, height about 10mm. No core.

With the tiny Neo the coil barely fell to the side.

With the medium Neo it flew maybe 80mm.

With the large Neo stack it fulminantly flew about 200mm, but was then stopped by the wire connections.

Could it really be that simple?

The future

Permanent magnets have their limits. However, in space temperature is near 0 deg. Kelvin resulting in superconductivity, which would increase the efficiency by several magnitudes. The resulting Free Energy could be used to power greenhouse spacestations and spaceships.

But even simple "earthbound" applications may exhibit very interesting results.

According to accepted beliefs in established science, permanent magnets can only convert energy, but are not an energy source by their own.

But there are certain problems with this theory. Strange seems the fact, that very simple experiments obviously do not obey the laws of physics and yet are completely ignored by mainstream science.

One of these experiments that everybody can do at home I will now present to you. It consists of a coreless coil, about 100 turns, a 9V battery and a permanent magnet. Arrange the parts, so when you connect the battery to the coil for a brief moment, the coil will be repelled by the fixed permanent magnet. Measure how far the coil was repelled.

I am quite sure there are formulas that explicitely show how and why the coil went that far, solely based on the electric current consumption from the battery. Seemingly, that's all nice and fine.

Now replace the permanent magnet by a much bigger, stronger permanent magnet. Repeat the exact same test, with the same DC pulse to the coil. This time the coil is pushed much further away than before.

How can this be? We used the same amount of input energy from the battery, but the output as a repelling force has increased. Where does the additional energy come from, if not from the permanent magnet?

In fact, it is stupidly simple. Total force= force of permanent magnet + force of coil.

Basicly, this is exactly what we have been searching for for so long time. A way to turn on and off a permanent magnet. Actually, we turn on and off only whether the coil is reacting to the magnet or not. But the effect is the same.

Conclusions:

By increasing the strength of the permanent magnets, less energy is required by the coils to maintain the same torque.

By infinitely increasing the strength of the magnets, the coils energy requirement would decrease infinitely, while maintaining the same torque.

By infinitely increasing the strength of the magnets, the torque would increase infinitely, therefor there is no linear relation between DC coil pulse and motor torque.

It must be possible to increase the strength of the magnets up to a point, at which the torque delivers enough energy to power an (inductively isolated) conventional generator, which then powers the coil pulses. Such a device would clearly violate a bunch of laws.

Applications

Back in the 19th century magnets were weak and expensive. The introduction of the selfexciting generator without permanent magnets lowered production costs greatly. Mechanical input energy was cheap. So permanent magnet motors and generators became widely obsolete.

Today we have strong Neodymium magnets, it should be possible to obtain considerable amount of torque even with a small motor. Although a big magnet with 1000 pound pull costs maybe 2000$, smaller magnets are much cheaper and can be stacked to increase their strength.

Right now this whole thing sounds too easy and too good to be true. All I can say is I made a test, as described above, with 3 magnets: a tiny Neo, about 5mm x 3mm, a medium size Neo about 5mm x 30mm, and a large stack of 4mm Neo disks, in all about 10mm x 70mm.Coil was 0.5mm average diameter about 20mm, height about 10mm. No core.

With the tiny Neo the coil barely fell to the side.

With the medium Neo it flew maybe 80mm.

With the large Neo stack it fulminantly flew about 200mm, but was then stopped by the wire connections.

Could it really be that simple?

The future

Permanent magnets have their limits. However, in space temperature is near 0 deg. Kelvin resulting in superconductivity, which would increase the efficiency by several magnitudes. The resulting Free Energy could be used to power greenhouse spacestations and spaceships.

But even simple "earthbound" applications may exhibit very interesting results.

Now don't take this the wrong way because I admire people who actually build things and try new ideas out in the physical.

The above having been said, the error in your experiment was the ACCURATE measurement of the wattage used in each repulsion test of different magnets of different strengths. The ones that moved the farthest used more total wattage from your battery. Yes, the voltage may have been 9VDC in each case, but the current was much higher due to the higher inductive force with the more powerful magnets.

What sometimes helps inventors to understand magnets is to view them as springs. A spring can repel objects and a spring can also keep objects together making them difficult to separate as well. Can a spring motor work? Well clocks and watches use springs to power them, but they will always require rewinding, so the energy cannot be perpetual. It is important to understand that a magnet motor that spins forever and generates excess energy is pretty much the same as creating a spring powered motor that never needs winding.

Thanks for your interest. I did the same with a cap, the results where the same. The amount of energy available for a short pulse was the same for all tests, in watt, or joule.

Although your explanation would rescue the law of energy conservation, I think you're wrong here. The decreasing fieldstrength induces an attractive superimposition in the coil, which works against the repelling pulse, therefor increases the resistance of the coil. Even tho, this should lower the repelling force, the observation remains as described.

I agree with you.The problem as always is wrong interpretation of physic laws. I think that any object sitting on the table is working continuously against gravity (the molecular forces repel the object from the table). Magnet hanging on fridge is also doing work and energy is taken from vacuum, because magnetic field is "broken symmetry of vacuum"Magnetic field and energy is one and the same.

Thanks Forest. Actually the german wikipedia entry on magnetism even says "Every magnetic Field contains Energy." Although wikipedia often isn't really helpful ^^.

See it this way: if you put two magnets into a glass pipe in repelling order, the top one will float above the bottom one at a certain distance. If you replace the bottom one by a much stronger then this distance becomes larger, simply because the repulsion forces add up.

Now, it is certainly possible to limit the current draw as desired, and finally ending up just like in the pipe example with two repelling forces, that are added together.

Now replace the permanent magnet by a much bigger, stronger permanent magnet. Repeat the exact same test, with the same DC pulse to the coil. This time the coil is pushed much further away than before

The stronger magnet also induces stronger back electromotive force within the coil. That is, you would need to use higher voltage at the input for to achieve the same increase of current, like at the case of weak or no magnet (plain ferromagnetic core). You can imagine it in reversed way, by utilizing the coil as a dynamo. The moving of coil inside stronger magnetic field would induce higher voltage at the coil. This is just the voltage, which you should overcome once you arrange the experiment in the opposite way: by utilizing the force exerted by coil loaded with voltage pulse.

In my theory you cannot draw energy from coils and magnets until their response will be perfectly symmetric and reversible in time like the ideal spring - only under situation, when the magnetization of coil of magnet exhibits some delay, jumps of steps.

By using a stronger magnet you are obviously making the device more efficient. Considering the fact that this is how good old dc motors with permanent magnets fixed to the case work, you should be getting more shaft output power than dc input if you were extracting any power at all out of the magnet. I think something in the mid 90% is about the best you can get back, but i'm not much into motors.

Here is a system that probably really works, but practically could be a problem.You could use a system for example that changes the capacitance of an already charged capacitor. A solvent between plates acts as a dielectric . Charge this cap and allow the acetone or whateversolvent to evaporate. The decrease in capacitance has given the cap many joules indeed, huge amounts more. Check it out by simple calcs using dielectric constants, and its not hocus pocus.

I have experimented with this some years back. It's true you can demonstrate these differences but how practical is it in real world application?What's not being considered here is the difference in work force achieved between an air core vs a cored coil and the reason no practical motor has no cores.

Now, lets say you stay with coreless coils and you keep increasing the size of your magnet and even make larger coil if you wish. In time there will be a point where the coil will produce as great of current (generator effect) then the coils input, which is caused by the coil moving through the larger magnet.

This is "counter EMF" and happens to all coils when moved in a magnetic field while the input power is switched on.At this point you will realize the breaking effect caused by any coil moving in a magnetic field "while powered".There are other braking effects at play as well. At the same time the coils copper mass is subject to Eddy Currents which is another braking effect which increases proportionally with a stronger magnet or magnetic field.

Consider that at this time your test device is too small to visually detect these braking forces. However, in time as you increase the size of your magnet and decrease your coils dc resistance it will become more apparent.

I have taken builds and tests to those levels.This may save you time and money if you read the remainder of the topic below which has video demos and results.Even though my tests are done with cores the results eventually come to the same. No Gain

You cannot escape the above facts. However, there may be a motor coil topology that once you power the coil the outside magnet flux field may not penetrate the coil which in return may beat the above laws.

You can take whatever energy you wish from magnetic field. Magnet can for example hold itself to the fridge wall for 100 years. ;-) You cannot take energy from inertial perspective however, unless you are the famous baron...

You can take whatever energy you wish from magnetic field. Magnet can for example hold itself to the fridge wall for 100 years. ;-) You cannot take energy from inertial perspective however, unless you are the famous baron...

And you can glue an ordinary unmagnetized piece of iron to the side of a fridge with Krazy Glue and the iron will stay in place for 100 years.

Now replace the permanent magnet by a much bigger, stronger permanent magnet. Repeat the exact same test, with the same DC pulse to the coil. This time the coil is pushed much further away than before.

How can this be? We used the same amount of input energy from the battery, but the output as a repelling force has increased. Where does the additional energy come from, if not from the permanent magnet?

All that this requires is a simple rational analysis of the situation. You don't even need to replicate it or make any measurements at all. You can do the entire experiment in your head and the answer is quite trivial.

There is no "additional energy" at all. Just think through the problem and arrive at the right conclusion.